On May 10, 2012, at 5:12 PM, Michael Sharpe wrote:
>> On May 10, 2012, at 1:51 PM, David Watson wrote:
>>> What I don't get is the insistence of performing all of these strange font installations, when all you have to do is find the fonts in your personal library (assuming you have Adobe Reader or Acrobat installed), double click on them so that they open in Font Book, click on the button in the sample pane to install the font, and then use LuaLaTeX with the fontspec package to declare the fonts:
>>>> \usepackage{fontspec}
>> \pdfprotrudechars=2
>> \pdfadjustspacing=2
>> \newfontfeature{Microtype}{protrusion=default;expansion=default;}
>> \defaultfontfeatures{Microtype,Ligatures=TeX}
>> \setmainfont[Ligatures=TeX, BoldFont = {* Semibold},BoldItalicFont={* Semibold Italic}]{MinionPro}
>>>> You can remove the options for the BoldFont if you don't have the Semibold weights and/or you prefer it that way.
>>>> Here are a few reasons off the top of my head:
>> (i) you may be using LaTeX packages that are incompatible with XeLaTeX and LuaLaTeX---a point that came up earlier in this thread;
>
Fair enough.
> (ii) many mathematics journals, including those run by the American Math Society, have a work-flow based on traditional latex+dvips and eps graphics only;
>
If the journal is going to use its own font anyway, why bother with using Minion Pro?
> (iii) at the moment, there is no Opentype math font that matches MinionPro well enough for professional work---they are usually too heavy or too light;
>
MinionMath doesn't match? I'll cc: Johannes Kuester on this to see if he agrees.
> (iv) though they are steadily improving, neither XeLaTeX nor LuaLaTeX is 100% compatible with all LaTeX math packages, some of which have been built especially to match a particular text font.
>
Point taken.